Featured Calvin: God is the Author of Sin

Sorry for that and thank God all is well

Thank you, bring them on

Wrong. One does not have to harbor doubts about their arguments or theories to be disingenuous; they may simply be tying 'loose ends', I mean who does not cherish 'neat' theories?

So Calvin appeals to mystery to get around obvious contradictions of his philosophy.

I'm afraid it's more than 'seem';he says as much. And he is aware of this inevitable charge hence attempts to preempt it by framing reservations and appealing to mystery.

If you think he believed otherwise, is it too hard to ask for evidence? I have faithfully backed my claim with ample citations. Either I quoted them out of context,in which case I humbly request you quote them in their context, or I skipped others indicating his contrary stance which I will request you to share.

Does it matter how vehemently one denies talking about number two when they are talking about the square root of four?

I disagree. He started with a deduction before going for a fishing expedition. Or perhaps he lingered too long at the feet of someone who did.

I was very particular in my OP. Once we sufficiently deal with that, we can always interrogate scriptures on the subject.

 

Read OP. This is not about Calvinists, bible nor what God can('t) do but what John Calvin said on the subject topic.

 

How do you know?

 

I can also throw a counter link. Please interact with these statement s instead of sending me on a wild goose chase

 

I'm sorry but predestining 'everything' including thoughts and intents and shirking from their consequences is pure nonsense regardless of how loudly he protested to the contrary.

Anyone who interacts with Calvin even at a distance would immediately appreciate that He was an astute scholar, and his theories are elaborate.

He did attempt to deal with questions that others felt were 'unable or unlawful to learn'. Quite possible he was sincere. Where he erred was in defining the boundaries of his attempts as well as the logical conclusion of the same as mystery.

Anyone criticizing or questioning him was intruding into the unlawful.

 

I started a thread on these terms and I wish to deal with them there.

But how does God 'set his love on those of His choosing'?

In other words, it is a question of causal determination. Can God with absolute infallibility know the future unless he causally determines acts of men?

Philosophers (or is it theologians) are still at it and they arrive at different conclusions.

Calvinism and open theism share a common view that it is impossible for God to know the future except he causally determines it. God only knows what He causes. This as I said is in line with Lincoln's famous quote.

 

Oh, 'secondary' causes?
But is that will itself not subject to God ad Calvin himself readily acknowledges in the statements I quoted?

 

And as I said, there is a special place for mystery in theology. I gave a few examples too.

But mystery does not redeem hopeless contradictions. So Calvin may no more appeal to mystery merely because the inspired Paul appealed to it than he may pen an epistle just because Paul did.

If I developed a system of beliefs/theories that
1. Christ resurrected bodily from the grave, and
2. Christ's body is still in the grave
3. Appeal to mystery to 'cover' the logical contradiction of proposition #1 & #2

What would you make of my brazen lunacy?

 

I was equally agnostic on the same till I ran into these quotes of his. Have you taken time to read them? If you did, all your doubts would dissipate. Permit me not to quote them again for if you,or anyone else, can't or won't read them, what confidence do I have that they will read them now after I repost?

You mean you are not conversant with his understanding of predestination?

Terrible consequences befell Servetus but that's a story for another day

 

Fair enough.

there is no random power, or agency, or motion in the creatures
Like I shared, I'm interested in what Calvin is effectively communicating not his intentions or objectives.

He is reassuring that God is in control because God would have to knowingly and willingly decree every 'random power,agency or motion' of creatures [which may harm them]

I think immediate reference is to sorcery.

You would agree 'random power,agency or motion' are evidently pointing to creatures (whether men or spirits,or both is irrelevant)

As I said, vehemence in denying what you are obviously implying is what.....contradicting yourself.

Look at the excerpt about the Fall
They deny that it is ever said in distinct terms, God decreed that Adam should perish by his revolt... They say that, in accordance with free-will, he was to be the architect of his own fortune, that God had decreed nothing but to treat him according to his desert. If this frigid fiction is received, where will be the omnipotence of God, by which, according to his secret counsel on which every thing depends.

Please put this in plain word...in your own word. Please paraphrase frigid fiction in your words.

Servetus I have read about him.

There was no capital sentence in Geneva
All old laws on religion were in 1535 scrapped save banishment. But these primitive laws are revived coincidentally day after Servetus arrives, and he is charged.

Barely a year before Institutes had need declared to be 'God's Doctrine' meaning nobody could speak against the theories therein.

Calvin had as much hand in Servetus trial and death as humanly possible. If nothing else, focus on the defense he offered for his role all the way to his death.

posterity owes me a debt of gratitude for having purged the Church of so pernicious a monster.
http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/history/8_ch16.htm

What amazes me is the extent to which his descendants go to cover it.

We should pick it up some time on a different thread.